Site Sponsor

Why is Ann Coulter joining forces with unindicted HAMAS co-conspirator CAIR Action Network in supporting a HAMAS Judge? Well, she has a blind affection for Chris Christie (who appointed Judge Sohail Mohammed), so maybe she’s just your typical anorexic who’s a chubby chaser–you know the reverse image of Jack Spratt and his wife. Maybe it was the Muslim boyfriend she liked to brag about “dating” (euphemism) and to whom she dedicated one of her books. Or maybe it has something to do with her latest object of ire: the Jews.

Ann:
Do you really believe Chris Christie’s lies about Sohail Mohammed and that Sharia isn’t a problem here? Mohammed defended an ADMITTED HAMAS member (who PLEADED GUILTY to being a HAMAS member) and Christie helped him keep the HAMAS guy here after ICE sought to deport him. You are defending this? If so, you really have done a 180 and it’s disturbing. If this is the guy you want for President, you clearly don’t know much about him, not just his Islam stuff, but his global warming BS, too.

Ann, do you really support this kind of thing? If not, you need to issue a correction. A lot of people have been contacting me asking me why you’d support and defend this crap. And I have no idea why you would.

Debbie Schlussel

As I noted, Coulter did not respond to my e-mail. Sohail Mohammed, as I’ve told you several times before denies knowing anything about HAMAS, despite representing Qatanani (who pleaded guilty to being a HAMAS terrorist), testified at his New Jersey Senate hearings that he didn’t know what HAMAS was or anything about it. Oh, and Sohail Mohammed, Chris Christie’s new judge, has ZERO–yes, ZERO!–trial experience.

Yet, Ann Coulter thinks this is terrific. And she agrees with Chris Christie that there’s no threat of shariah law–that it’s “crap” like Chris Christie says in the video to which she approvingly linked and which she promoted on her website. Ann agrees with Christie that those of us opposed to HAMAS judges and the sharia threat are “crazies.” Yup, that’s your conservative. She calls the truth about Sohail Mohammed, about whom she apparently knows zip, “slander.” Wow, it’s amazing. This woman wrote a whole book with “Slander” as its title, and yet, she still doesn’t know the meaning of the word, except when she does it to Jews.

Coulter’s references to the Jews recently have been disturbing. After telling us how Ron Silver went to church with her, took communion, and helped her buy a Christmas tree, Coulter wrote that the Jews prayed for the death of the late Jewish actor Ron Silver, after he became a conservative and her friend. Total BS. So she didn’t get tagged with making this claim, she alleged that Silver made the claim himself (and later adds that he was “joking”). Sorry, Ann, but I doubt he ever said any such thing, “joking” or otherwise. Easy to put a quote in the mouth of a dead man who can’t refute its veracity. Here’s a tip: most American Jews hadn’t even given a second thought to Ron Silver, since he portrayed Alan Dershowitz in a movie, decades ago. Sorry, Ann, I am a Jew who is proudly conservative, but I know many liberal Jews and the name, “Ron Silver” . . . well, it just never came up, honey. He’s as common a topic among Jews as is the joys of lutefisk.

Then, she cried over the death of noted neo-Nazi and open anti-Semite Joseph Sobran. In her column, she called the proud Jew-hater Sobran, “the world’s greatest writer.” Then, she rubbed it in Jews’ and Israel-supporters’ faces, by saying that Sobran–a noted Israel-hater and Arabist/pan-Muslim devotee–inspires support for Israel. Riiiight. I had to barf when I read this:

I’ve often used a Sobran observation to explain why I have a greater affinity to Israel than to the Muslim world after 9/11.

Who is she kidding? Not anyone familiar with the writings of Sobran. If his written version of brown-shirtism qualifies as “the world’s greatest writ[ing],” then so does Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

And, last, but not least, Ann recently did a column about rapists. Strangely, every single rapist she mentions in the column–every single one!–is Jewish. Whatta coincidence. Oh, and don’t forget when she wrote about Connecticut’s Democrat then-candidate for U.S. Senate, Richard Blumenthal, whose claimed service in Vietnam was fake, she wrote a column to make sure everyone knew he was a Jew and sarcastically alleged that he wanted to “become the first Jewish President,” along with Eliot Spitzer.

This activist, interventionist Democrat — like his identical, slightly less oily twin, Eliot Spitzer — decided at age 5 he was going to be a U.S. senator and then the first Jewish president. And he doesn’t care how many lives he has to destroy to get there.

Hey, she’s learned well from her hero Joseph Sobran and his oily twin, Father Coughlin. Only a bigoted hypocrite would single out these two Jews In Name Only for their religion, then call those of us objecting to a HAMAS judge “slander[ers].”

Clearly, someone no longer sees HAMAS and HAMAS-enabling judges as the problem. And that someone is Ann. For her, the problem now is apparently Jews. And so, there are two things that CAIR and Ann Coulter now agree on.

Ten years ago ago, she was spot on! Conservatives who place blind loyalty to party and policy – especially when the latter is rotten – are not doing the country a service.

Its just well Ann Coulter didn’t respond cuz she knows she can’t defend it. Christie and his Islamist judicial pick are bad for America and any one with intelligence who isn’t blinded by questionable loyalties from the truth knows this.

No decent person on earth can defend Islamists and those who would inflict them upon America. I leave readers to judge Coulter in light of her defense of Christie and his Hamas judicial appointment.

In the last few years, she had a couple of fairly, and unevenly good columns, when she defended Joe McCarthy, and the outstanding book about him by M. Stanton Evans against detractors, although, even then, the detractors she attacked were disproportionally Jewish; she could have picked a huge number of detractors who were not Jewish, but focused disproportionately on the Jewish ones.

Debbie could have picked a number of additional examples of columns where Jews are attacked disproportionately.

Sobran had pretensions about being a Shakespeare scholar, but most of his drivel consisted of unsupported assertions that maybe Shakespeare’s plays were written by others. No serious textual, plot or character analysis. And he was a rabid anti-Semite; this is how he kept himself in the public light, as, otherwise, his writings could never have kept income flowing in. True of other anti-Semites by the way, including Buchanan, and, more and more, Coulter, since she seldom has anything substantive to say except to make jokes and witticisms about issues where, otherwise, political discussion has already been exhausted.

Further, her columns are generally vacuous, and devoid of real substance. She makes witticisms, a few of which are funny, but for a supposedly serious columnist, this is not a substitute for serious political analysis. To my knowledge she has not discussed the problem of illegal alines, except for a few consecutive columns at the height of concern about congressional votes on the subject. And this is over a multi-year period. Maybe she didn’t want to attack her buddies.

Thanks DS. You ask all the right questions and are NOT afraid to take on people who may be considered sacred cows. Good stuff.

I can’t fathom why this late in the game AC is embarrassingly STILL fawning over Christie. I, for sure, thought she would see and embrace the truth months back.

Yes, it’s true that AC has been confounding fellow REAL Conservatives as of late. I do not read her column regularly but I am now wondering where this Jewish angle she is taking is coming from? As a Christian, I have NO desire to be anti-Jewish. Why is this creeping anti-Jewish bent such an easy road to (sometimes slowly) travel down for some Conservatives (yes, I am thinking of Pat Buchanan)?

My spidey-sense was tingling with AC with her dismissing so-called “birthers” as crazies. She obviously is not doing her homework on that subject. If she did she would see that the person who is most factually correct on that is virtually unknown and even more ignored. (Jack Cashill) In the Obama Administration, you have to question that because the lie is the truth and the truth a lie and AC knows that but is not following the strong stench. WHY????

That “Chubby Chaser” observance is not all that farfetched. I was never certain whether or not her babbling about the “sexiness” of Joe McCarthy was merely a facetious ploy to get attention, or a genuine fetish. Strange how she’s never had anything to say about Roy Cohen.

Looks like there was a bit of truth to the animated cartoon, Boondocks. I laughed at the episode where she was lampooned with rev al and were good friends after the cameras were turned off. She had a black muslim boyfriend with a do-rag. It was on the comedy channel after 11pm. As usual, thanks for the extra info not found in most media. Just when I think I’m ultra informed, Debbie hands me something new to my eyes.

Coulter is a lawyer, too. Someone with legal training should be able to defend themselves. Silence is not admission of guilt but that’s true only in criminal court. In every other situation, failure to respond can be held against you. There is simply no acceptable defense of the Sohail Mohammed appointment I can think of. Coulter would have attacked it, if Christie had a “D” beside his name. That makes her a hypocrite. And gushing over evil is never good no matter what side it comes from.

I’ve seen Debbie defend Ann on several occasions on this blog. I believe the two were personally friendly for many years.

If you look at the date/time stamp on Debbie’s email, it was sent to Ann just before sundown on Friday night (Shabbat). If you look at the time stamp on this column, it was sent just before sundown on Tish B’Av (Tish B’Av is a solemn Jewish fasting day. “Holiday” is not exactly the right word for Tish B’Av.)

I would like to think that 72 hours was sufficient time for a friend like Ann to at least drop a quick note to say: “Let’s talk about it before you say anything public.”

It always pains me to see two friends split like this. Yet I’ve wondered for the past year or two: “How long can Debbie let Ann continue without saying anything?” I believe this may have been coming for some time and may have involved other dis-agreements (and previous dialog between the two). My guess is that Debbie took a lot of time and exercised a lot of patience before finally writing this kind of column. I’m a bit saddened by this, but I understand it. Deb did the right thing. I don’t think this “came out of nowhere” in a mere 72 hours.

I just thought you (and other readers) would want to keep that in perspective.

I’ve never really trusted Ann Coulter, and I’m on the Right. She’s far more interested in the sensational than the sensible, in the process making many of us look bad. She takes constant cheap shots at liberals without admitting that some actually are decent and principled people (not too many, admittedly.). And unlike Debbie, Coulter does very little, if any, original investigative reporting.

As for Coulter’s enthusiasm for Islamic immigration, this doesn’t surprise me either. Few care to know this, but just prior to her rise to fame, during the mid Nineties, Ann worked as an aide to Sen. Spencer Abraham, R-Mich., covering various issues, including immigration. Abraham was and remains a hardcore opponent of all immigration restriction. Think of Ann Coulter as Grover Norquist, only better looking.

I’m stunned, just stunned! I’m really disappointed and heart-broken by Ann Coulter, and I know your heart-broken by her Debbie! And I aslo understand that the two of you are good friends and the two of you don’t have any issues with eachother.

Question, why hasn’t Coulter responded to your email about that pro-hamas judge in New Jersey? Folks, I was thinking of not typing a message on this blog or any political blog today, but I logged onto this website and saw the title and couldn’t believe what I read. But I couldn’t stay away from this blog, because I’m a little addicted to this blog (NOT obsessed with this website or with Debbie Schlussel herself). DS, I hope Ms. Coulter respond to your email sometime in the future, hopefully sooner than later!

Ann Coulter has been a crank for years. I stopped taking her seriously after the 1990’s. Even the National Review had the good sense to dump her as a writer in 2001. That might explain her affinity for Joseph Sobran, who was personally terminated by William F. Buckley. His subsequent career represented nothing more than a downward spiral in which the bottom was reached when he became associated with the Institute for Historical Review(Neo-Nazi Front Group), which is best known for its Holocaust Denial literature. No, if Ann wants to lionize National Socialists and dress like a 19 year old at 50+, that is her business. However, when she passes herself off as a mainstream conservative, it becomes the business of others.

His subsequent career represented nothing more than a downward spiral in which the bottom was reached when he became associated with the Institute for Historical Review(Neo-Nazi Front Group), which is best known for its Holocaust Denial literature.

Is that so? I’m not surprised AT ALL!!! I’ve always said people who say Bacon or the Earl of Oxford or Queen Elizabeth I wrote Shakespeare are on a level with Holocaust deniers. Elizabeth I died in 1603, by the way, while the plays were still being written!!!!

Debbie, could you please provide a link to some of Joseph Sobran’s anti-Semitic writings?

It’s the 9th of Av. For those of you who are fasting today, I wish you an easy one.

For those of you who live in England, in any of the cities hit by the riots, I hope that you, your families, your friends and your businesses are safe from the rioters.

Sorry, you are very late to realize that Ann Coulter is a faux-conservative. She’s always been a phony, but many just don’t realize it. She’s just like Sean Hannity or Patrick Buchanan, who have no real conservative principles, but use the “conservative” brand solely as a means to enrich themselves.

The last great conservative in major media was William F. Buckley, whom I’ve had the pleasure of meeting once in Chicago–and there is nobody like him on the media landscape. Notably, Buckley, who was a devout Catholic all his life, made a point of chasing out all anti-Semites from his circle. (I love that YouTube video of him debating leftist Noam Chomsky, wherein Buckley suggests that he might punch him in the face.) There are no Barry Goldwaters or Ronald Reagans out there today–sad to say–and Buckley had an important role in their ascendancy.

The current “Tea Party” does not and cannot follow Buckley’s intellectual and ideological politics, and so it is littered with garbagepail faux-conservative politicians and media people like Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, etc. etc.–who have much more in common with leftist politics than they do with genuine conservative politics–when you learn to read between the lines and the con.

There are no real conservatives anymore – ethically or intellectually speaking. The movement has become a mirror image of those it despises, with much the same pathologies in abundance. There is too little real critical thinking, a lot of slavish devotion to favored politicians and a tendency to value theatrics over substance. That may be why its popular with the intellectually challenged but its not conservatism for the serious person. At least not like it used to be.

I reported some of these things on Debbie’s last two posts on Chris Christie–and yet I’m still stunned. Little did I know that Debbie had emailed Ann Coulter about these things and more. Also, Debbie, I know that you also are stunned and heart-broken by this.

Sean R., on when you said on Debbie’s most recent post on Chris Christie that what Ann said back in 2007 about Christians being “completed Jews” was anti-Semitic, and I told you that I thought that she cleared it up? (I wasn’t aware of this excellent site back then). Well, unless Ann eventually responds to Debbie’s email and clears things up, then I have to say that you were right and I was wrong.

Also, Skunky, I kept this thought off-line, but I also thought that Ann Coulter joining the chrous of dismissing the “birthers” as crazy was wrong on her part. She did not do her homework, just like you said.

Jeff, I remember you mentioned about the comment that Ms. Coulter made four years ago about jewish people. And I did read Debbie’s archives about that comment Coulter made on Donny Deutsch’s television show. When I read DS’s archives over the weekend about Coulter from 2007, Debbie said that she wasn’t offended by AC’s comment and many posters on those two particular threads weren’t offended either by Ann Coulter’s comment.

I remember I was listening to Michael Savage’s radio show that week and he was pretty upset by Coulter’s comment, dude, I was shocked and a little disappointed with Dr. Savage that whole week. But Savage is entitled to his own opinions and viewpoints about Ann Coulter, if was a little offended by her comment, that’s his opinion, I really wouldn’t call AC an anti-semite, on her blog she has written pro-Israel and pro-jewish columns over the years.

And I also remember DS wrote a column back then that a arabic-muslim group “condemned” Coulter and called her an anti-semite! Ironically, that group islamist group is about as anti-semitic as they come, and they had the audacity to call AC an anti-semite! Last I checked, that muslim group is NO friend of jews or Israel in general.

Sean R., I also listened to Michael Savage that week and he indeed reacted just as you said that he did. And of course he’s entitled to his opinion just like you said.

As for me, it though, it wasn’t until AC had a chance to clear things up on Hannity & Colmes a couple of weeks or so later that she had successfully explained herself to my satisfaction. And I also read over this past weekend the two columns that Debbie wrote of it as well, including one describing the hypocrisy of an Arab/Muslim group calling AC an anti-Semite, just like you said.

I too think Ann Coulter is generally pro-Israel and pro-Jewish. I think that AC is a partisan conservative. On some issues she’ll criticize some on the right from the right, but on others AC considers to be sacred cows. Among them are Patrick J. Buchanan, the late Robert D. Novak, and, as Debbie described above, the late Joseph Sobran. Also, in going after the leftist JINOs, Ann gets too carried away. And of course, now also Chris Christie and this judge. But on these things, the Ron Silver matter and other things that Debbie decribed above, it would just be best if AC would just respond to Debbie explaining these things and clear these things up.

Yes Jeff, any real Conservative that seeks the truth AND admits that ZerObama’s paternity is questionable HAS to at least admit that like most everything else in his life, HIS truth is a little shady and hinky and that there is room for questioning.

I am NOT into Alex Jones, I hate conspiracy theories and I only like barking up a tree work barking up at. So since I think all “truthers” are nutters it proves I have no desire to waste my time on crazies. The “birther” issue is far from crazy.

Through DS’ diligent investigative reporting (which she does well in an age where most IR’s are as hard-to-find as serve and volley tennis players) she proved he forged his selective service papers…and Jack Cashill has done even more IR on his proving 100% that Zero wrote NEITHER of his books and that it’s likely BO was NOT the son of BO Senior. And that is contrary to what most “birther’s” think…that BO was NOT born here in USA. I don’t believe that anymore.

The evidence is overwhelming (and I must admit on the “birther” issue NOT 100%) and intriguing and anyone just testing the waters on the topic would have to be a fool or a liar NOT to want to peek further. So I don’t trust these so-called Conservative fools who dismiss it so readily. The fault is in THEM not following the stink. Peeps like that have an agenda (I believe) of not wanting to look like a kook…when it is far more kooky (and disengenuious) to dismiss it. That’s Ann Coulter.

She says Ron Silver was joking in the very next sentence which I grant is technically ‘later’. [I’d give her the benefit of the doubt on that. I must admit I might give people in general to much benefit]

If you are refering to “TO LIBERALS, EVERY WOMAN LOOKS LIKE A HOTEL MAID”, shoehorned in between Polanski and Strauss-Kahn is the name Clinton. Granted I’ve never been very good at “Guess who’s a Jew” But the most egregious case Andrew Luster didn’t strike me as a Jewish name. Is it because his family name is associated with precious metals?

Although I read her column every week, I learned a long time ago never to put all your hopes in any one person. I’d just as soon get her autograph as push her off a train. [I have no interest in either]

Major Nidal Hasan, accused of the 2009 mass shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 dead, has retained his military rank and continues to get paychecks from the government, the base commander said Wednesday.

Lieutenant General Donald Campbell, Jr., the commander of Fort Hood, said Hasan’s confinement and medical expenses are also being paid for by the military, KXXV-TV reported. He receives weekly medical treatment and is occasionally transported to meet with his defense team.

Hasan was shot during the attack and is reportedly paralyzed from the waist down.

Campbell said the actions are to ensure Hasan gets a fair trial.

Yup. 13 dead American heroes are all but forgotten. Its too bad the SOB wasn’t rendered a quadriplegic!

Oh, let’s call a spade a spade. Ann Coulter hasn’t been a real American since her Islamic buddy slipped her a Halal salami. One wonders why, if she is such a gung-ho Christian, she even slept, oops, “dated” a Muzzie.

She is one of many frauds, who makes outlandish statements that make real conservatives look bad. Then again, I think this woman makes these statements, knowing it will get her lots of sound bites in the popular media.

And for those who think she is great looking…forget it. I have seen her up close, and she is very “hard” looking. Underneath her two inches of make-up, I think you will find a skeletal face worthy of The Crypt Keeper.

I see your email to Ann is dated Friday around 4:46 p.m. Your column posted today at 4:49 p.m. I suppose that 3 days should have been enough time for Ann to either respond to your email or call you on the phone.

I’m sad to see your previously friendly relationship with Ann Coulter come to an end like this. However, I know what you wrote above was necessary… VERY necessary. Moreover, I think your timing reflects decency and deep consideration.

You were slow to reach this conclusion about your longtime friend Ann; I understand that. Privately, I was kinda wondering when this was going to happen, but I’m glad you took your time. You carefully considered it all before publicly confronting her. In my lonely opinion, it was the right thing to do and the right time to do it.

Regards,

TINSC (aka There is NO Santa Claus)

P.S. I have no clue who Ron Silver is. I guess I’ll have to google his name and see what you’re talking about there.

I don’t know if Coulter is anti-Semitic or not. I do know whenever she has a book coming out she makes sure she gets plenty of publicity by making controversial comments.

My other observation applies to many Jews on the right(including possibly Debbie). For many Jews on the right,if they believe someone is pro-Israel, that person pretty much gets a free pass as far as being labeled anti-Semitic.

There has been more than prominent Evangelical preacher who has either made outright anti-Semitic statements (Jerry Falwell,Billy Graham,Bailey Smith,etc) or had Jewish names prominently represented in various conspiracy theories (Pat Robertson). Yet, because most of these preachers are pro-Israel, many Jewish conservatives have defended them against anti-Semitism charges.

In their defense of these preachers, conservative Jews always use Israel as their defense.

It’s entirely possible for someone to support Israel because of their Evangelical belief in the Second Coming of Jesus in Israel while at the same time harbor dislike of Jewish people.

S: Huh? I have never given someone a pass for anti-Semitism b/c they “support Israel.” Just the opposite, in fact. I think it’s fraud to say “I support Israel” as a defense for Jew-hatred, as many people do on the right. As a longtime reader, you should know better than to accuse me of something like that. DS

Debbie, I said “possibly including Debbie”, so I wasn’t accusing you,but for even saying possibly, I stand corrected. My point about Jews on the right stands. Too many of them use support for Israel as their measuring stick of anti-Semitism.

This jerk Christie is yet another example of a growing danger to Israel. Jew-hating Muslims have apparently concluded that the best chance for destroying Israel is to weaken American support for Israel via 2 ways: flood the US with Muslim immigrants who can become future voters, and also throw Muslim money at corrupt dhimmi politicians while at the same time invite them to mosques and dinners and be photographed with them.

Debbie has done an excellent job at pointing out these politicians, many of whom are supposed to be conservative.

Julia Gorin did a good piece of a similar vein to this article. It was concerning Ann Coulter’s perhaps underlying anti-Semitism which became slightly more known via the death of Joseph Sobran. Ann Coulter’s support of Israel was presented in such a way as to imply she supported the lesser of two evils. In a nutshell, it’s not real support at all –it’s condescending.

I really can’t abide all the fake buffoonery-related spiel over Israel that both the left and right say.It’s not heartfelt but rather just political posturing.

Israel is the Jewish homeland. They have a legitimate birthright to that piece of land.End.Of.Story.

We shouldn’t like the Jews in Israel because the Jews are more civilised than the Muslim jihadists so we better support them out of those two groups. We should support them because they are correct and justified to stand for their right to exist and should not be forced into a new holocaust.We should support them because they are our BROTHERS AND SISTERS with regards to all those who uphold Judeo-Christian civilisation.

Sometimes I feel certain commentators say they like Israel, not because they really do, but because their faith compels them to pay lip-service to it.

Ann Coulter claims to be a conservative. In other news, Milli Vanilli also claimed to be singers.

Though I continued to read her, my respect for Ann Coulter plummetted when she quoted, approvingly, Sobran’s suggestion that the Earl of Oxford wrote Shakespeare. The Earl of Oxford died in 1604 and Shakespeare was writing in 1612.

1. Coulter is simply opportunistic, and is an “entertainment” conservative. The sound bites do work for her, as she sells books and gets plenty of TV time. It’s easy for her to poke fun at contemporary issues, but she never really did have much of a philosophical base.

Jon Grant also raises the issue of her “dating” this Muslim guy, after essentially condemning publicly (and rightly so) their entire ethos with her “conversion” diatribe.

2. As to Buckley, I realize that he is a hero to many, but if you look at him objectively, there are many flaws.

Perhaps the biggest was his embrace–as a supposed conservative–of a “temporary” military and bureaucratic build-up, just until we win the Cold War.

As Buckley declared in 1952, fighting the Cold War meant that “we have got to accept Big Government for the duration,” including “a totalitarian bureaucracy within our own shores” with its “large armies, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant centralization of power in Washington.”

Why genuine conservatives who favor limited constitutional government came to embrace Buckley as one of their leading spokesmen is truly a mystery.

Indeed, Buckley’s rapier wit—that regularly attacked Federal social programs with great aplomb—was AWOL in the wake of pointless military adventures and intelligence extravagances.

Why, it must be asked, is it somehow inherently better—nay, completely justified—to spend excessively on these causes, while social program spending is bad? Tax dollars misused are still tax dollars misused, right?

But, there is more here than just overspending, or even decrying dubious foreign adventures. In the case of the Cold War, for example, why was it fought?

The stock answer is that the Ruskies were using their power and influence to dominate the rest of the world, and they had to be stopped or at least controlled. Fair enough, but what intelligence were we getting in those days?

How difficult would it have been to determine that without exception all of the Soviet satellites were in desperate economic shape, antiquated and backward in every way save military prowess? Thus, why not just let the great Soviet experiment implode—as it surely did by 1990?

I have little doubt that such intel was coming in, but was suppressed since it didn’t serve the purpose at hand.

The purpose at hand, of course, was to build a giant military/intelligence apparatus, which, irony of ironies, proved utterly useless whenever put to the test. Infamously, it did NOT predict the fall of the Soviet bloc.

This apparatus has continued to grow, without a Cold War. In government, nothing succeeds like failure. Please give us more of what didn’t work before.

3. Goldwater is often cited as a real conservative, and he was…for a time. Too bad he softened up as he got older.

4. Sadly, after Robert Taft died, paleo-conservatives in the political scene just about disappeared. Tellingly, the Republicans screwed Taft in 1952 to give Eisenhower the nomination.

Red Ryder – in “The New American” magazine, I read a quote that went something like “If William Buckley didn’t exist, (‘someone’ or ‘the powers that be’?) would have had to create him”.

And Jeff_W…her live stand up act at the book signing & “meet” I attended got boring real quick…worst stand-up act I ever heard…some of the jokes I caught were funny, some not so much (I admit to being a little slow & uninformed).

I just read her new book Demonic. I thought it was a good book. I don’t like watching her on TV, but I like her overall. I like Debbie in a similar manner. I like 99% of what both say but sometimes I just shrug my shoulders at the other 1%.

PDMac, it’s not just Ann Coulter who’s gushing over Chris Christie, other conservatives are doing the same nonsense. For instance, if you go onto Andrew Breitbart’s website, at times you see a propaganda ad that goes like this “Vote Chris Christie for President” and the samething can be said for other Republicans ads on Breitbart’s website.

I also doubt that Michelle Malkin, Newsbusters, National Review, Townhall, WND, etc. would dare write a article on their shill blogs about Chris Christie appointing Sohail Mohammed for judge in New Jersey. The reason why those right wing blogs haven’t written an article about Christie’s support for Mohammed is because Christie has an “R” next to his name. As one poster (NormanF) said yesterday, had Christie had a “D” next to his name and he appointed Mohammed as judge, Coulter and all of the conservative blogs would be all over the issue like gnat flies on a dead animal.

Point well taken on professional conservatives supporting Christie. Where Debbie is rock solid is that she simply does not sell out.

The “pros” see dollar signs behind every position they take, and–invariably–will piss off enough people (e.g. Coulter on this very thread) to lose some support.

Far better to hold to your core positions, which sadly almost no one except Debbie actually does.

Ironically, whatever success the Dems have had in the last century can be attributed to holding to their core “principles”–even if most on this blog would disagree with them. A notable exception, of course, was civil rights, but given a sycophant media, they were able to pull off this deception.

Moreover, most failures the Repubs have had stem from abandoning any principles at all.

I am losing my voice telling Americans not to jump on the bandwagon of any one before they know the full story. But theu insist to be naive suckers as a right. Well if the right is wrong please don’t have it.